Civilian aircraft protection
Discussion
After flight MH-17's terrible disaster it has got me thinking. Is it now aircraft manufacturers should start thinking about supplying airliners with anti missile protection like this for e.g http://youtu.be/KbI2Hj-xXGM.
I know civilian aircraft should have no threat to these sort of attacks but it amazes me how many flight paths cross over countries which are unstable and under conflict. Do civilian airliners have any detection of such threats?
It's obviously doable as the US Presidents Air Force 1 Boeing 747 has it installed.
Regards
I know civilian aircraft should have no threat to these sort of attacks but it amazes me how many flight paths cross over countries which are unstable and under conflict. Do civilian airliners have any detection of such threats?
It's obviously doable as the US Presidents Air Force 1 Boeing 747 has it installed.
Regards
Radar missiles need radar warning receivers and chaff.....I'm not sure they'll be landing armed airliners at major international airports. The jammers typically fitted to large transport aircraft are generally infra-red only, ie heat-seeking short range manpads.
The likes of the buk or SA11 is a whole new ball game, unfortunately.
The likes of the buk or SA11 is a whole new ball game, unfortunately.
It's a fairly stupid idea.
First off, you're most vulnerable at takeoff and landing, so maybe you want flares. Only trouble is, you've just set fire to the airport or the local housing estate.
Maybe missile radar is the answer. OK, so what evasive action are you going to take in a full airliner? You might as well have a little screen that says 'U R DEAD'.
As the Emirates president said the other day:
First off, you're most vulnerable at takeoff and landing, so maybe you want flares. Only trouble is, you've just set fire to the airport or the local housing estate.
Maybe missile radar is the answer. OK, so what evasive action are you going to take in a full airliner? You might as well have a little screen that says 'U R DEAD'.
As the Emirates president said the other day:
Tim Clark said:
Some people say planes should be armed with counter devices. That will go absolutely nowhere. If we can't operate aircraft in a free and unencumbered manner without the threat of being taken down, then we shouldn't be operating at all
Quite right.Eric Mc said:
A couple of Farnborough Air Shows ago (probably the 2006 show) I spoke to a chap who was from a company that were supplying such systems to commercial operators.
No European passenger Airline or any that I know that isn't El Al would even contemplate putting on anti-missile defences. The only ones I can imagine being remotely interested are some freight carriers who might operate in an airlift capacity on military contracts and so may find themselves operating into sandy places with restless locals.Our rule is that we simply avoid the areas where you might get shot at. If you need a flare dispenser or chaff, then you've already stuffed up.
In terms of risk vs cost to mitigate, then fitting anti-missile kit is a no-goer for 99.99999% of commercial aviation.
Seems a bit of a non starter to me. The Tim Clark quote above sums it up.
The idea that simply deploying some flares and chaf makes a airliner immune to all threats is surely nonsense. Watching documentaries on C5's and C17's the crew's attitude upon entering war zones isn't "never mind the all the potential threats lads, we have plenty of flares"
What, i wonder, would an experienced SU27 driver make of some big bad flares dispensed for a Boeing or Airbus.
The idea that simply deploying some flares and chaf makes a airliner immune to all threats is surely nonsense. Watching documentaries on C5's and C17's the crew's attitude upon entering war zones isn't "never mind the all the potential threats lads, we have plenty of flares"
What, i wonder, would an experienced SU27 driver make of some big bad flares dispensed for a Boeing or Airbus.
Seems a bit of a non starter to me. The Tim Clark quote above sums it up.
The idea that simply deploying some flares and chaf makes a airliner immune to all threats is surely nonsense. Watching documentaries on C5's and C17's the crew's attitude upon entering war zones isn't "never mind the all the potential threats lads, we have plenty of flares"
What, i wonder, would an experienced SU27 driver make of some big bad flares dispensed for a Boeing or Airbus.
The idea that simply deploying some flares and chaf makes a airliner immune to all threats is surely nonsense. Watching documentaries on C5's and C17's the crew's attitude upon entering war zones isn't "never mind the all the potential threats lads, we have plenty of flares"
What, i wonder, would an experienced SU27 driver make of some big bad flares dispensed for a Boeing or Airbus.
Maybe you should talk to the guys I was talking to at Farnborough and tell them they were wasting their time.
And while you are at it, you tell those operators who bought such systems that they were wasting their time AND their money.
I am pretty sure that the BA aircraft that the Queen uses when on official duties are fitted with additional devices that at least warn of threats.
And while you are at it, you tell those operators who bought such systems that they were wasting their time AND their money.
I am pretty sure that the BA aircraft that the Queen uses when on official duties are fitted with additional devices that at least warn of threats.
Lots of people at Farnborough are wasting their time, or rather that of their shareholders or investors. I don't why you think that trade show presence equals merit - maybe you haven't been to enough of them!
Flares, chaff and whatever other battlefield instruments you can think of are not going to make their way onto commercial aircraft. Even when the more obvious threat was dumb rockets fired out of a drainpipe at the end of the runway, there were better measures to be taken.
You know this, you're talking about a big old bus plodding along in a straight line. If someone has the kit and wants to shoot it down, they will. Fortunately for everyone, it must happen about once in many million flights.
Flares, chaff and whatever other battlefield instruments you can think of are not going to make their way onto commercial aircraft. Even when the more obvious threat was dumb rockets fired out of a drainpipe at the end of the runway, there were better measures to be taken.
You know this, you're talking about a big old bus plodding along in a straight line. If someone has the kit and wants to shoot it down, they will. Fortunately for everyone, it must happen about once in many million flights.
Eric Mc said:
Maybe you should talk to the guys I was talking to at Farnborough and tell them they were wasting their time.
And while you are at it, you tell those operators who bought such systems that they were wasting their time AND their money.
I am pretty sure that the BA aircraft that the Queen uses when on official duties are fitted with additional devices that at least warn of threats.
Oddly enough Eric, I've never felt the need to fit this sort of kit to the 42 aircraft currently in the fleet, nor have them fitted on the 45 new ones we ordered at Farnborough, but hey, what would I know?And while you are at it, you tell those operators who bought such systems that they were wasting their time AND their money.
I am pretty sure that the BA aircraft that the Queen uses when on official duties are fitted with additional devices that at least warn of threats.
The blokes at Farnborough are selling to a very small crowd. VVIP's are generally paranoid about security and so these security firms can easily play on their fears and since money is generally no object, then adding a system that may be totally useless but makes them feel better is the goal of the salesman.
A big lumbering bus of an aircraft is an easy target. You don't need massive SAM systems such as the one that took out MH17, just park near a runway with a couple of RPG's and a heavy machine gun and if security are a bit lax, then no matter of whizzy kit is going to stop you being turned into a fireball.
Edited by IforB on Wednesday 23 July 16:23
J4CKO said:
Is that a possibility ? all the security seems to be about not allowing stuff/people onto planes ?
Well, to be blunt, how would you know about airfield perimeter security unless you'd tried to break it?There've been a few incidents and purported plots - who knows what's real. There was one actual incident in Mombasa about ten years ago but ironically it was against an Israeli plane that may have had some systems fitted. That probably didn't do any good as they supposedly don't have flares and were attacked with old school heat seeking Strela missiles.
IforB said:
Oddly enough Eric, I've never felt the need to fit this sort of kit to the 42 aircraft currently in the fleet, nor have them fitted on the 45 new ones we ordered at Farnborough, but hey, what would I know?
The blokes at Farnborough are selling to a very small crowd. VVIP's are generally paranoid about security and so these security firms can easily play on their fears and since money is generally no object, then adding a system that may be totally useless but makes them feel better is the goal of the salesman.
A big lumbering bus of an aircraft is an easy target. You don't need massive SAM systems such as the one that took out MH17, just park near a runway with a couple of RPG's and a heavy machine gun and if security are a bit lax, then no matter of whizzy kit is going to stop you being turned into a fireball.
100% agree. He said that it was the "sensitive" type customers (read ... "paranoid") who ordered this kit.The blokes at Farnborough are selling to a very small crowd. VVIP's are generally paranoid about security and so these security firms can easily play on their fears and since money is generally no object, then adding a system that may be totally useless but makes them feel better is the goal of the salesman.
A big lumbering bus of an aircraft is an easy target. You don't need massive SAM systems such as the one that took out MH17, just park near a runway with a couple of RPG's and a heavy machine gun and if security are a bit lax, then no matter of whizzy kit is going to stop you being turned into a fireball.
Edited by IforB on Wednesday 23 July 16:23
All I am saying is that it exists - if you want to fit it.
The idea was bandied around quite a bit some years ago. A mate at the time was working at Spadeadam maintaining the threat equipment and was hoping they wouldn't bring them in as he regularly tested the radars on stuff like his SA-2, SA-10 and ZSU-23/4 by tracking stuff in and out of Newcastle airport 
The RAF don't seem to share your concerns
http://www.raf.mod.uk/equipment/bae146.cfm
Mind you small IR missiles such as terrorist organisations are likely to get thier hands on don't seem to be that effective against relatively cold high bypass engines if Mombassa is anything to go by.
http://www.raf.mod.uk/equipment/bae146.cfm
Mind you small IR missiles such as terrorist organisations are likely to get thier hands on don't seem to be that effective against relatively cold high bypass engines if Mombassa is anything to go by.
Edited by RizzoTheRat on Wednesday 23 July 17:04
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff